Search engines, google won't see XWD Sites?

[himagain]

Hi people,
It appears from my very early induction process that XWD pages won't be spidered by Google?????

My Sites are content-rich and rely on search placings to make my millions (eventual )

Essentially I rely on good article take-up and The Great Google finding my cunning keyword rich confabulations.....

[steve.ledger]

And you say this because?
Please enlighten us

[covoxer]

It appears from my very early induction process that XWD pages won't be spidered by Google?????

Do you have any links to your new sites placed on the sites rated by Google?

[Drwyd]

hi Himagain

I have a couple of sites that are part hand-coded and part XWD created and all pages are performing equally on google. Most modern search engines to a good job of digging through code to get to the content. You need have no concerns

Drwyd

[himagain]

Hi there Drwyd and fellow members,
It's the "handcoded" part that worries me a little. So long as it isn't the stuff you want spy-dered that has to be by hand........

I suddenly realised (while working on the other problems posted today) that if all the text material was converted to images by Xara, then the Spyders wouldn't see the text as it was now basically an image!

[himagain]

Do you have any links to your new sites placed on the sites rated by Google?

Hi John,
No this all pre-launch of a new project - first of many xara-works I hope - if i ever get over the few little things as mentioned here so far.
Aside from them it seems fantastic - especially for a codaphobe like me. I've worked for years with just ol' FrontPage. Gave up on Dreamweaver.

Cheers!

[himagain]

And you say this because?
Please enlighten us

Because Xara converts everything to images. And they aren't much good for the content spyders, are they?
Worse than frames as I understand it.
I hope I do have it worng!!!

Cheers?

[covoxer]

Because Xara converts everything to images.

No it doesn't.

And they aren't much good for the content spyders, are they?

Yes, images are no good.

Worse than frames as I understand it.

Not worse, because you can use ALT attribute on images while frames are completely ignored.

I hope I do have it worng!!!

Yes, it looks like you did. The text is exported as a text usually. But it may be converted to image in cases when it can't be rendered as a text by browser, or if you ask for it. Here's the list of effects which applied to text object force it to be converted to image:

- grouped text objects (Ctrl+G) are always exported as image;
- any kind of fill except for flat single color fill;
- any kind of transparency;
- rotated, skewed or flipped text objects;
- shadow;
- feather.

If you had not applied any of the above to your text object, it will be exported as a text.

[steve.ledger]

I hope I do have it worng!!!

Yes you do - very wrong

Text is text unless you do something else to it.
It's all in the help file and spoken about many many times in the forum.

Have a look at Xara's http://webdesigner.xara.com/ site and check the source.
It's a WD created site where the text is text.

Or you can look at any of the many sites already created by users in the 'Show Us Your Sites' thread, and check their source too.
But the easiest way to check text in a WD created website is to drag-select some text on the web page itself. If it's an image you won't be able to drag-select a line, word or single letter.

[himagain]

No it doesn't.
Yes, images are no good.
Not worse, because you can use ALT attribute on images while frames are completely ignored.
Yes, it looks like you did. The text is exported as a text usually. But it may be converted to image in cases when it can't be rendered as a text by browser, or if you ask for it. Here's the list of effects which applied to text object force it to be converted to image:

- grouped text objects (Ctrl+G) are always exported as image;
- any kind of fill except for flat single color fill;
- any kind of transparency;
- rotated, skewed or flipped text objects;
- shadow;
- feather.

If you had not applied any of the above to your text object, it will be exported as a text.

AHA! But if I did - it's an image. Which explains what happened when I did test the hypothesis!
THIS was the clue..... in fact fill was the missing key.

Thank you again.